Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Riyad Kalla <rsk@×××××××××××××.edu>
To:
Cc: gentoo-dev@g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] What happend to portage speed?
Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2003 14:26:11
Message-Id: 3F520563.90509@email.arizona.edu
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] What happend to portage speed? by John Nilsson
1 Maybe the code to print out that "done" statement is unoptimized?
2
3 a la:
4
5 for(int i = 0; i < 10000000000000; i++);
6 printf("...done");
7
8 :)
9
10 John Nilsson wrote:
11 > Actually it seems most time is spent after each "...done" statement.
12 >
13 > -John
14 >
15 > söndagen den 31 augusti 2003 kl 16.16 skrev leio@×××××××××××××××××.org:
16 >
17 >> On Sun, 31 Aug 2003, John Nilsson wrote:
18 >>
19 >>> No, no. The download is quick. But the calculation of deptree and that
20 >>> kind of things that takes so much time.
21 >>>
22 >>> Also what is this metadata directory? (Sorry for not RTFM).
23 >>>
24 >>> -John
25 >>>
26 >>
27 >> After every rsync it rebuilds the cache... at least by default.
28 >> That's what takes the most time with an emerge sync on my 166MHz
29 >> computer.
30 >> It was discussed a while ago that the cache has changed maybe by 5%, but
31 >> it does it all again. Parses some things, writes lots of files to cache,
32 >> etc. There were ideas how to make it quick again, but unfortunately
33 >> either
34 >> no-one has brought it to reality or into the official portage.
35 >> If that's not your speed problem, disregard this e-mail, but I believe
36 >> this the most time demanding operation with emerge sync as of now.
37 >>
38 >> Mart Raudsepp
39 >>
40 >>
41 >> --
42 >> gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list
43 >>
44 >
45 >
46 > --
47 > gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list
48 >
49
50
51 --
52 gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list